I'm getting too old to till up the garden plot every spring. But keep posting that while the cops are monitoring this board and they come out every year and dig it up for me.

Same friends who will take you out for a snipe hunt at midnight? Just for the LULZ? Consider yourself lucky they didn't hand you a stick and get you to poke the bear.

Microsoft Corprolite

Investors are chasing a company that achieves some kind of AI singularity. Let's set aside the fact that there's no reason to believe there is anything but diminishing marginal returns by making marginal refinements to current frontier models. Let's imagine someone hits the jackpot and gets, not even AGI, but a system that's as far ahead of today's frontier model are ahead of 2020's GPT 2.0 in performance.

Globally AI revenues are 150 billion, against a cumulative burn rate of 450 billion. A model that is a generation ahead of others would almost certainly capture the lion's share of that revenue.

If AGI magically appears as a Sam Altman has promised investors it will, a hundred million is way too low. Add, maybe, another zero to the revenues.

Conservatively, a safer assumption is that frontier models will get marginally better based on refinements in training and reinforcement and the other bits and bobs that go into these systems. The nobody is winning the lion's share of anything, at least overnight. But you have to define "safe". By "safe" I mean unlikely to lose money. But some investors are clearly defining "safe" as "having the greatest chance of owning a piece of the biggest thing ever."

I'm not following this super-closely, but if Anthropic is pursuing adding multi-step model based reasoning to their system, that could be the basis of a generational leap in capability. But if that is an approach that looks like it has a chance of working, then their competitors are no doubt pursuing the same thing. In that case you'd expect the revenue pie to grow as the scope of model utilty increases, but that growth to be split among several competitors. This could credibly result in a revenue stream for some of them that is as big as the entire industry's revenue stream today. But there's going to be hell to pay on the data center impacts end of things.

Putler also doesn't believe Russia's borders end anywhere.

The entire point of a state that governs itself with the consent of its citizens is advancement of the interests of the citizens of that state. It isn't fighting global inequality or advancing the interests of those in other states at the expense of their own.

Unconstrained immigration is almost always a bad idea. It leads to failed integration, ghettoization, prejudice and resentment. This issue is turbo charging the rise of right wing politics throughout Europe.

If the original ToS on Twitch grants Amazon a license to create derivative works then they don't have anything to worry about.

It's like your local superstation had the rights to run ads on Star Trek in addition to the license fee they paid but they didn't therefore get a right to create a new Star Trek series or publish a "Best Moments of STTNG 1989" show around the holidays.

Now if they had gone to Paramount about the Best-Of show in theory they could have negotiated a license for that, having already been media partners. Heck, some software company got Riker to pitch their product from the Bridge.

The big authors' settlement with OpenAI sets at least some precedent in this nascent field of IP law (which is enforced whether we like it or not).

But I've never heard of a Twitch streamer talking about a derivative work that Amazon created from their show using their words or likeness.

To be fair Youtube does indeed do a yearly "best of" show.

Who knows, maybe we'll see an AI Hassan Piker doing and saying some wildly ill-advised shit in the near future. Would not be entirety shocking.

Spain has a population of 50 million. They should have sent required forces to Ceuta to block or interdict the invasion well in advance and made its intentions known.

Are you seriously asking why it matter that weakness is getting people killed? The trigger for this was a seemingly permissive supreme court ruling in Spain. Merkel for her part intentionally lit up a neon sign both showings of weakness resulted in needless death. If people know they will not be allowed to invade they won't bother to go in the first place which is the best scenario for everyone.

You come in force and physically stop them and provide suitable transportation back to where they came from. More importantly is to make it known you won't tolerate invasion in advance so this shit doesn't take place to begin with.

Did you learn nothing from Merkel who got thousands of people killed with her come to Germany stunt in 2015? Weakness gets people killed, in this particular case over 100 people died to say nothing of a terrorized local population.

Jesus Christ, WTF are you talking about? Over 100 people are dead.

The AP is irrelevant in all of this. Certificate validation occurs between the EAP server and supplicant. When the server is done it furnishes encryption keys to the AP for it to use.

The supplicant uses its trust anchor to validate the cert the same way any web browser would. The real problem is having a valid cert is completely meaningless because its identity is tied to nothing not even the SSID of whatever you are connecting to.

This solves nothing because anyone (including Defcon attendees) can obtain a valid certificate. What what is needed are secure authentication algorithms rather than endless parades of absurd band-aids that only make the lack of secure authentication even worse.

Using existing infrastructure and code one could do this quite easily using a PAKE rather than certificates for mutual authentication within EAP-TLS.

Where are you getting this? Press accounts are stating use of outdated data not AI.

I don't understand why it would be necessary to use "AI" rather than deterministic algorithms. All you are doing is calculating state vectors and telling people what to do to accomplish a preprogrammed goal.

ATC should be completely automated and VHF radios replaced with CPDLC. There is no reason for humans to be manually executing algorithms a computer can do perfectly 100% of the time. Way past time to get rid of the entrenched interests with their blah blah blah.

This technology is an unusable insecure clusterfuck. Unlike normal secure sites linked to DNS names cert identities are pointless indicators of nothing. For it to be secure you have to constrain both certificate identity and issuer which in the real world will only ever happen if your supplicant is provisioned by an administrator. Without it WPA-Enterprise is completely insecure. Most supplicants will gladly connect without proper verification and not so much as issue a warning while doing so.